13 April 2017

The White House Report - TTG

“We have confidence in our assessment because we have signals intelligence and geospatial intelligence, laboratory analysis of physiological samples collected from multiple victims, as well as a significant body of credible open source reporting, that tells a clear and consistent story. We cannot publicly release all available intelligence on this attack due to the need to protect sources and methods, but the following includes an unclassified summary of the U.S. Intelligence Community's analysis of this attack.”

Oh, that’s slick… and a real crock. This report gives the impression that the White House has more classified evidence that can’t be exposed to protect sources and methods. That’s a reasonable impression. The IC report on the Russian attack on the 2016 election process made the same claim and suffered widespread skepticism by doing so. This is as it should be. Given the primacy of information operations and the all consuming desire to control the narrative, it’s difficult to take anybody, especially a government, at their word. If we are serious about protecting intelligence sources and methods, we must accept this conundrum as a way of life. I only accept the premise of the IC Russia report because of my ten plus years of experience with the subject matter, not because the IC said so in a report lacking any convincing evidence. But I recognize this White House report on the Syrian chemical attack of 4 April as a steaming pile of manure for precisely the same reason.

While the IC Russia report stated its classified evidence simply would not be exposed, the White House Syria report states what it used for evidence… mostly jihadi produced social media evidence. That’s fortunate because we can examine all this open source information with a critical eye. It is curious that this is a White House report and not an IC report. Is the IC on board? I doubt it. Phil Giraldi said “that military and IC personnel intimately familiar with the available intelligence say that the narrative that Assad or Russia did it is a sham, instead endorsing the Russian narrative that Assad’s forces had bombed a storage facility.” There are few people I take at their word. Phil Giraldi is one of them.

Of the sources cited by the White House report, only signals intelligence can be considered classified evidence. The bulk of its evidence is available for all to examine. Many have done so. I suggest we look at these and, if so inclined, do some digging ourselves.

The only new claim made by the White House report is that Syrian personnel formerly associated with SAA chemical weapons were present at Shayarat Airfield. Perhaps former SAA and SAAF chemical troops were at the airfield. These troops have undoubtedly been redeployed to other jobs throughout the Syrian forces after the Syrian chemical weapons and stores were destroyed. Was this the signals intelligence? Not too impressive. Recordings of the Syrian pilots over Khan Shaykhun would be a far more convincing piece of signals intelligence, but such evidence is not alluded to in the report.

Geospatial intelligence is the fancy word for overhead photography and Google Maps/Google Earth. The lab analysis of blood, tissue and urine samples was provided by Turkey, the long time supporter of IS and the jihadis in Idlib. I consider that to be part of the jihadi information operation. Soil samples and debris from the suspected gas shell, which would provide much more definitive evidence, are mysteriously not available.

Almost all other evidence is from local accounts, photos and videos provided by the Al Qaeda White Helmets and other jihadi sources. The report claims this local evidence can’t be faked. That’s a joke. A cursory review of videos and photos show unprotected “rescue workers” handling contaminated bodies with impunity, a dead child with a number on her forehead opening her eyes, an elderly man sitting on the ground having his keffiyah pulled off his head by what appears to be a film director. These are just little things that struck me. I was also struck by the many accounts of a chlorine smell from the odorless sarin gas.

The White House report claims the rationale for a Syrian Air Force chemical attack is that Assad’s forces were in a dire military situation north of Homs. By the time of the Khan Shaykhun attack, the SAA already recaptured most of the territory lost to the jihadi Homs offensive and the Homs airport was no longer threatened. Any air attack on Khan Shaykhun, chemical or conventional, would have no military effect on the Homs front. This rationale attributed to the Syrian government by the White House is absolutely bogus. The White house report would be more believable if it claimed the gas attack was the result of a series of mistakes and miscalculations by Syrian personnel.

The White House goes to great lengths to disparage the Russian explanation of a Syrian attack on a jihadi munitions manufacturing/storage facility. Much of this disparagement consists of dismissing the Russians as devious tricksters. Yes, the Russians are damned good at information warfare and active measures. I admire their skills and abilities at this craft. It is precisely because of this Russian expertise that I find the idea of a deliberate chemical attack perpetrated by their close ally to be ludicrous. What would be the devious objective of this attack? Surely these master tricksters would have a plan for this and would have implemented it by now.

Perhaps the Russians will reveal some intelligence on the jihadi munitions storage/manufacturing facility at Khan Shaykhun. Maybe someone could do some geospatial intelligence analysis of this facility. I would find both, or either one, quite satisfying.

On a more serious note... even if Trump knew it was a false flag, I don't think he would have acted any differently given the pressure cooker he's in. Once that propaganda op got released to the press with a public that's been primed for more than 5 years about how evil Assad is, and given the Borg's ongoing propaganda campaign trying to tie Trump to Russia, and given the pushback Trump has gotten from his war on the IC, what else could he have done? Once again attack the IC? Not in his interest for so many reasons.

He needed a psychological victory and for the establishment to support him in something. So a somewhat lame attack was made on Syria. And it worked for his reputation among the Borg. The truth and reality are rarely relevant to the Borg, except when it makes them look good.

I am afraid you are right about that. Resistance was futile. The only slight hope I see is that rather than the Next Generation episodes with the Borg, we think of the Voyager episodes in which at least one Borg was reintegrated into human society, at least in some degree.

But mostly, I have little hope that very many people are left who want to resist the Borg or who can even recognize when they have become assimilated themselves.

And I would recommend the rather nicely done and thorough review of the "Un-Classified" Report from the WhiteHouse by Theodore Postol, which I think is an excellent try at doing what anyone who is interested in TRUTH would do -- an analysis of available information. The link is: https://imgur.com/a/W4zQx#xC7yL6U

It's nicely written in a style that I (being an old engineer/scientist in the aerospace business) really appreciated. And sufficient pictures and charts, etc.

There has been no finding made as to whether the designated terror organization once known as Al Nusrah Front has launched any chemical weapons attacks.

While the OPCW found that sarin gas was used in the 2013 Ghouta attack, no official determination was made as to who carried out the attack, in part because that was beyond the scope of the OPCW mandate.

As to the claimed chemical weapons attack on April 4 in Khan Sheikhoun, earlier today Reuters reported that:

While all the focus has been on the use of sarin gas, according to a press release issued by Doctors without Borders on April 5, their medical teams on the ground observed victims at a number of different medical facilities from the claimed attack "smelled of bleach indicative of possible exposure to chlorine" as well as some victims at one medical facility "displayed symptoms consistent with exposure to an agent sarin gas or similar compounds."

Further, in seeking to sort out what happened, people may find the following reports of some interest.

The first is an interview of Martin Chulov, The Guardian Middle East correspondent on April 7 of value.

His reporting is being relied upon by many of those saying the Syrian Arab Armed Forces carried out a chemical weapons attack on April 4 and in the interview Mr. Chulov provides a summary of what information they have gathered concerning the attack. He also discloses that the Guardian has sent a reported to visit Khan Sheikhoun.

In the interview, the AFP correspondent asks Syria's President about a claim that 20% of the Syrian Air Force was destroyed due to the missile strike. During a joint press briefing on April 11, Defense Secretary Mattis clarified that he meant 20 aircraft were destroyed. People can read a transcript of that briefing at the following link.

"Last Tuesday on the 4th of April, the Syrian regime attacked its own people using chemical weapons. I have personally reviewed the intelligence, and there is no doubt the Syrian regime is responsible for the decision to attack and for the attack itself."

Also, Reuters has published a report summarizing the key points made by President al-Assad in the AFP interview:

'Responding to Thursday's Syrian army claim, U.S. Air Force Colonel John Dorrian, a spokesman for the coalition, said it had carried out no air strikes in the area of Deir al-Zor at the time.

"The Syrian claim is incorrect and likely intentional misinformation," Dorrian said in an email to Reuters.

The Russian defence ministry said it had no information about people killed in an attack by international coalition forces in Deir al-Zor, according to RIA news agency. A ministry spokesman said Russian forces had sent drones to check the area.'

In addition, in the same report we are told:

The British delegation at the world's chemical weapons watchdog said samples taken from the alleged attack site tested positive for the nerve agent sarin.

"We believe it is highly likely that the attack was carried out by the Assad regime," British Prime Minister Theresa May said in a televised statement. "Apart from anything else, we believe it's only the regime that has the capability to make such an attack."

I forgot to mention what I thought was an extremely important point he made regarding a shallow crater with a flattened and damaged "pipe" (he said it was around 122mm --same diam as a rather common rocket). here's my favorite paragraph which discusses the photo of a shallow crater and the pipe remnants within it and what he thinks is a reasonable conclusion from this - with caveats.

>(quote)No competent analyst would assume that the crater cited as the source of the sarin attack was unambiguously an indication that the munition came from an aircraft. No competent analyst would assume that the photograph of the carcass of the sarin canister was in fact a sarin canister. Any competent analyst would have had questions about whether the debris in the crater was staged or real. No competent analyst would miss the fact that the alleged sarin canister was forcefully crushed from above, rather than exploded by a munition within it. All of these highly amateurish mistakes indicate that this White House report, like the earlier Obama White House Report, was not properly vetted by the intelligence community as claimed. < (end quote)

The Independent, Reuters, and TASS are the sources for this fresh Wikipedia article on the Hatla airstrike. Descriptions of a white cloud turning yellow are remarkably consistent with descriptions of the Khan Shaykhun cloud.

TTG The old man and the scarf you mention also appears in other white helmet productions.
From what I can make of it, a number of people were gassed in a quarry and then white helmet actors (survivors of the attack) were placed amongst them at different points in the videos.

Hot from the presses.
A senior US official told CNN "We heard them planning a sarin attack in Idlib but decided that telling the world and all those little children would be counter-productive and give the kids bad dreams."
You can't have it both ways. You can't be omnipotent and then claim moral high ground.

Why would they lie? In short, careerism. If lying improves their prospects for enrichment in NeoCon think tanks, the MIC, and such, in times to come, well, they're down with that. What are the downsides, after all? Look at how things have worked out for other grand liars and war mongers in recent years, and wonder no more about why they would lie about it.

It is indeed saddening that things have come to such a pass, but in my estimation, they surely have.

Valissa,
IMO President Trump either got a horse head in his bed or he was lying on what he said he want to do from the get go. Considering this fast pace of full180 degree revirsal on polices he announced during the campaign, I tend to believe he got an offer from the Borg he couldn't refuse. IMO what he is doing don't make sense and or will not help him at all, this is, since the Borgistas will never want him or will ever trust him, in the meantime he is loosing his base, likes of Taylor. Not that he doesn't know this, but I don't think he has any better choice with 35% popularity than playing along with Borg.

Photo of McCain and various "characters" caption reads
"Sen. John McCain visited rebels in Syria on Monday, his communications director confirmed to CNN, making the Arizona Republican the highest ranking elected official from the United States to visit the war-torn country since its civil war began over two years ago."

Is it possible that trump is making moves to force Russia, in particular, to end the Syrian war already? Russia and Iran have allowed this to drag on, perhaps because the ensuing chaos/immigration has benefitted them. They could and should end it.

That would be very clever of trump and he doesn't strike me as all that clever.